[sindriava]

You seem very comfortable making unfounded claims. I don't think this is very constructive or adds much to the discussion. While we can debate the stylistic changes of the previous commenter, you seem to be discounting the rate at which the writing style of various LLMs has backpropagated into many peoples' brains.

[ewoodrich]

I can sympathize with being mistakingly accused of using LLM output, but as a reader the above format of "Its not x - it's y" repeated multiple times for artificial dramatic emphasis to make a pretty mundane point that could use 1/3 the length grates on me like reading LinkedIn or marketing voice whether it's AI or not (and it's almost always AI anyway).

I've seen fairly niche subreddits go from enjoyable and interesting to ruined by being clogged with LLM spam that sounds exactly like this so my tolerance for reading it is incredibly low, especially on HN, and I'll just dismiss it.

I probably lose the occasionally legitimate original observation now and then but in a world where our attention is being hijacked by zero effort spam everywhere you look I just don't have the time or energy to avoid that heuristic.

[roncesvalles]

Also discounting the fact that people actually do talk like that. In fact, these days I have to modify my prose to be intentionally less LLM-like lest the reader thinks it's LLM output.